Uncategorized

Dave’s Story

blogmeister Uncategorized , , , ,

I was apprised of your site on the internet and this contact address in your goal to maybe create safe havens for EMF sensitive people. I sincerely hope this can come to pass, but at my age it will most likely be too late for me personally, but at least others to come after me that are younger may not have to go through as much as what I have had to.

I think a big part of my EMF sensitivity is from 35 years of working around very intense electromagnetic fields at the John F. Kennedy Space Center in ground communications here in Florida. Most especially after about 1980 when a lot of computers were installed everywhere out there. I have found that digital electronics are far worse for making people EMF sensitive than are the old analog fields. Presently I cannot go on long trips because I cannot stay in motels because of chemicals used to clean the rooms and chemicals used in washing blankets and sheets such as scented detergents and fabric softeners, etc. Also in most  motels you get rooms with televisions, wi-fi, and even small electrical substations right on the other side of bedroom walls, along with some walls fronting on drink machines and icemakers. All of these put out strong EM Fields. I had a camper van that I used for a couple of trips, but it is now ruined because the area where I live here in Florida is full of mold, and now even though my van doesn’t leak, it’s now full of mold and makes me sick to sleep in it.

The other problem with travel is that after about a hundred miles or so of driving under high tension power lines either across the highway at intervals of parallel to it, my EMF sensitivity gets far worse with severe sharp pains in my head when next to or driving under these lines. The more exposure there is, the worse it gets, so that I eventually have to get off the highway and stay some where to recuperate. Then when I get back on the highway it starts all over again. So as a consequence I am confined mostly to this area where I live and cannot travel any more than about 75 miles from home. To make matters even worse, eating out in restaurants with allergies to all foods and on a strict rotation diet becomes a near impossibility when traveling unless I eat only pre-packaged junk from convenience stores that I know the exact ingredients of. (Believe it or not that is safer than restaurants in most cases, but of course maybe not as nutritious.

Dave Watkins, Florida.

 

The Biological Effects of Weak Electromagnetic Fields

blogmeister Uncategorized
This article was on the FCC website and is a PDF from Mr. Goldsworthy in the United Kingdom.
Problems and solutions by Andrew Goldsworthy March 2012
I ama retired lecturer from Imperial College London, which is among the top three UK universities after Oxford and Cambridge and is renowned for its expertise in electrical engineering and health matters. I  spent many years studying calcium metabolism in living cells and also how cells, tissues and organisms are affected by electrical and electromagnetic fields. In this article, I will try to explain in lay person’s language
how weak electromagnetic fields from cell phones, cordless phones and WiFi can have serious effects on human and animal health. These include damage to glands resulting in obesity and related disorders, chronic fatigue, autism, increases in allergies and multiple chemical sensitivities, early dementia, DNA damage, loss of fertility and cancer.
To read the entire article: Click Here

Jan’s Story

blogmeister Uncategorized , , , ,

My first symptoms were fatigue and poor neurological clarity in the late 1980’s, living in Massachusetts in a lovely colonial near the center of town. I had 4 children and worked part-time as a teacher of blind and visually impaired children.  I became disabled by chemical sensitivity and then electrically sensitivity in the 1990’s. My house had very high EMFs as a result of stray electricity coming into the house on the water pipes (from a neighbor’s poorly grounded electrical system.

I had to relocate to more rural areas to stop progress of the neurological impairment.  I lost my house, my career, my ability to do even the simple things like shop with my daughters a prom dress or for a first bra. I lost my ability to go to friend’s houses or church or stores and eventually had to move and leave my children behind. It was the hardest thing I ever had to do. I lost nearly everything in life that mattered to me.

I learned I had both mercury and lead toxicity, probably as a result of having mercury and other metals in my teeth and living in high EMFs. I learned that EMFs and microwaves mobilize mercury, and that having mixed metals in the mouth also mobilizes mercury.  I took chelators to remove the mercury and lead and got my life back, but developed migraine headaches from the chelators, probably because I had traces of mercury left in my teeth. There’s been a lot to learn.
-Jan Johnson, MA

The Bioinitiative Report

blogmeister Uncategorized , ,

In 2007, this report had been written by 14 (fourteen) scientists, public health and public policy experts to document the scientific evidence on electromagnetic fields. Another dozen outside reviewers had looked at and refined the Report. The most recent report was in 2012 (see below).

The purpose of this report was to assess scientific evidence on health impacts from electromagnetic radiation below current public exposure limits and evaluate what changes in these limits are warranted now to reduce possible public health risks in the future. Not everything is known yet about this subject; but what is clear is that the existing public safety standards limiting these radiation levels in nearly every country of the world look to be thousands of times too lenient.Changes are needed. New approaches are needed to educate decision-makers and the public about sources of exposure and to find alternatives that do not pose the same level of possible health risks, while there is still time to make changes.

Their findings back then included:

  • The effects of long-term exposure to wireless technologies including emissions from cell phones and other personal devices, and from whole-body exposure to RF transmissions from cell towers and antennas is simply not known yet with certainty. However, the body of evidence at hand suggests that bioeffects and health impacts can and do occur at exquisitely low exposure levels: levels that can be thousands of times below public safety limits.
The report goes on to implicate wi-fi radiation in brain tumors, childhood leukemia, and possibly other cancers and neurological diseases.  Children were noted to be particularly vulnerable.
  • These effects can reasonably be presumed to result in adverse health effects and disease with chronic and uncontrolled exposures, and children may be particularly vulnerable. The young are also largely unable to remove themselves from such environments. Second-hand radiation, like second-hand smoke is an issue of public health concern based on the evidence at hand.

 Bioinitiative Report 2012 http://www.bioinitiative.org/table-of-contents/

Summary of the results:
  • Bioeffects are clearly established and occur at very low levels of exposure to electromagnetic fields and radiofrequency radiation. Bioeffects can occur in the first few minutes at levels associated with cell and cordless phone use. Bioeffects can also occur from just minutes of exposure to mobile phone masts (cell towers), WI-FI, and wireless utility ‘smart’ meters that produce whole-body exposure. Chronic base station level exposures can result in illness.
  • Many of these bioeffects can reasonably be presumed to result in adverse health effects if the exposures are prolonged or chronic. This is because they interfere with normal body processes (disrupt homeostasis), prevent the body from healing damaged DNA, produce immune system imbalances, metabolic disruption and lower resilience to disease across multiple pathways. Essential body processes can eventually be disabled by incessant external stresses (from system-wide electrophysiological interference) and lead to pervasive impairment of metabolic and reproductive functions.
  •  Many disrupted physiological processes and impaired behaviors in people with ASDs closely resemble those related to biological and health effects of EMF/RFR exposure. Biomarkers and indicators of disease and their clinical symptoms have striking similarities.

See the website www.SAFEhelpsyou.org for more information on developing projects for referrals to areas that are safe for persons with EHS andMCS.

Computers ‘do not improve’ pupil results, says OECD

blogmeister Uncategorized , , , ,

In today’s current school environment, children are exposed to far more wireless radiation than adults.  Most schools employ Wi-Fi, use wireless devices as part of daily teaching, and a growing number have cell towers on campus or near campus.  Here’s a worst case scenario:  30 children in close quarters in a classroom, all downloading materials wirelessly from the internet at the same time, and each child has a smart phone “on” in their backpack, with a cell tower radiating into the classroom.  This happens every day in school.  Health considerations aside all this wireless exposure does not even improve student performance. 

The report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development examines the impact of school technology on international test results, such as the Pisa tests taken in more than 70 countries and tests measuring digital skills. Among the seven countries with the highest level of internet use in school, it found three experienced “significant declines” in reading performance – Australia, New Zealand and Sweden – and three more had results that had “stagnated” – Spain, Norway and Denmark. The countries and cities with the lowest use of the internet in school – South Korea, Shanghai, Hong Kong and Japan – are among the top performers in international tests. The study shows “there is no single country in which the internet is used frequently at school by a majority of students and where students’ performance improved”.

[ed note: Is this because of distraction or EMF frequencies disrupting the brain?]

Please see the report: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34174796

See the website www.SAFEhelpsyou.org for more information on developing projects for referrals to areas that are safe for persons with EHS andMCS.

World expert explains link between EMF and human disease

blogmeister Uncategorized , , , ,
In Ireland, at present, all references – including the Department of the Environment and the Irish Cancer Society – are to ICNIRP guidelines which are 1,000 times higher and for a short duration only.Nowhere is their reference to the BioInitiative recommendation or to long-term exposure. In a mere six years half of us will become electromagnetically sensitive. A prediction by Salzburg’s Dr. Gerd Oberfeld who addressed the Irish Doctors Environmental Association (IDEA) April 9, parallels the prediction by the Royal College of Physicians last year which predicted that half the Irish population will have “some form of cancer” by the year 2025. Oberfeld is credited with the policy implemented the city of Salzburg which has maintained the city as having the lowest electromagnetic radiation levels in Europe. Dr. Oberfeld has practiced environmental medicine with the Office of the Provincial Government of Salzburg provincial Health Directorate, Department of Health and Hygiene and Environmental Medicine since 1992 and speaker for the Austrian Medical Assn. on health issues since 1994.
See the website www.SAFEhelpsyou.org for more information on developing projects for referrals to areas that are safe for persons with EHS andMCS.

EHS can be trigger for MCS, Chronic Fatigue, Fibromyalgia, etc.

blogmeister Uncategorized , , , , , , ,

The term electromagnetic hypersensitivity or electrosensitivity (EHS) referred to a clinical condition characterized by a complex array of symptoms typically occurring following exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) even below recommended reference levels and is followed by remission through the complete isolation [1, 2]. The most frequently claimed trigger factors include video display units, radio, televisions, electrical installations, extremely low-frequency ranges of electromagnetic fields or radio-frequencies—including the so-called dirty electricity due to poor isolation of electric wires and telephonic lines, wireless devices, and wi-fi—fluorescent lamps and low-energy lights, appliances with motors, photocopiers, microwave transmitters, and high tension power lines (reviewed in [3, 4]). EHS is characterized by a broad range of nonspecific multiple-organ symptoms implying both acute and chronic inflammatory processes, involving mainly skin and nervous, respiratory, cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, and gastrointestinal systems, in most cases self-reported in absence of organic pathological signs except skin manifestations (reviewed in [2, 5]).

Clinical similarities and frequent comorbidity between EHS and the other medically unexplained multisystem conditions of environmental origin, like multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), fibromyalgia (FM), chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), sick building syndrome, Persian Gulf War veteran syndrome, and amalgam disease, to which EHS is often associated [6, 7], have induced many authors to hypothesize that these so-called idiopathic environmental intolerances (IEI), more extensively also defined as sensitivity-related illnesses (SRI) [8], may share common genetic and/or metabolic molecular determinants connected with an impaired capability to detoxify xenobiotics (for review, see [6, 9]).

See the website http://www.SAFEhelpsyou.org for more information on developing projects for referrals to areas that are safe for persons with EHS andMCS.

P. Levallois, “Hypersensitivity of human subjects to environmental electric and magnetic field exposure: a review of the literature,” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 110, supplement 4, pp. 613–618, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
S. J. Genuis and C. T. Lipp, “Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: fact or fiction?” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 414, pp. 103–112, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
R. Richman, A. J. Munroe, and Y. Siddiqui, “A pilot neighborhood study towards establishing a benchmark for reducing electromagnetic field levels within single family residential dwellings,” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 466-467, pp. 625–634, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
World Health Organization, “Electromagnetic Fields,” 2011, http://www.who.int/peh-emf/en/.
H. Seitz, D. Stinner, T. Eikmann, C. Herr, and M. Röösli, “Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) and subjective health complaints associated with electromagnetic fields of mobile phone communication-a literature review published between 2000 and 2004,” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 349, no. 1–3, pp. 45–55, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at ScopusL.
L.Korkina, M. G. Scordo, I. Deeva, E. Cesareo, and C. de Luca, “The chemical defensive system in the pathobiology of idiopathic environment-associated diseases,” Current Drug Metabolism, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 914–931, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
E. Palmquist, A. S. Claeson, G. Neely, B. Stenberg, and S. Nordin, “Overlap in prevalence between various types of environmental intolerance,” International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
S. J. Genuis, “Sensitivity-related illness: the escalating pandemic of allergy, food intolerance and chemical sensitivity,” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 408, no. 24, pp. 6047–6061, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
C. de Luca, G. Scordo, E. Cesareo, D. Raskovic, G. Genovesi, and L. Korkina, “Idiopathic environmental intolerances (IEI): from molecular epidemiology to molecular medicine,” Indian Journal of Experimental Biology, vol. 48, no. 7, pp. 625–635, 2010. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus

Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity from Microwave Technology Finally Medically Proven

blogmeister Uncategorized , , ,

Documented study links electromagnetic hypersensitivity as a real-time health issue that actually can be verified using standard medical procedures and testing capabilities. An international group of researchers aced it when they published their findings from the clinical study “Metabolic and Genetic Screening of Electromagnetic Hypersensitive Subjects as a Feasible Tool for Diagnostics and Intervention” in the November 2014 issue of Mediators of Inflammation. Please click on the link to read the entire study.

[ed. extracted from the study] In this study, the working hypothesis was that EHS, as previously proposed for MCS and other environmental SRI [19, 22], may as well be based on aberrant responses to physic or chemical xenobiotic stressors through airborne or other routes of exposure, due to inherited or/and acquired dysfunction of the chemical defensive system, that is the interrelated network of phase I and II xenobiotic-metabolizing and antioxidant enzymes [19]. Based on the results of our past clinical studies on MCS, FM, and CFS, we sought to assess if similar profiles of metabolic or genetic dysfunctions could be found in those subjects self-reporting EHS phenotype. To this purpose, we measured possible alterations of a previously identified panel of twelve blood redox and lipid parameters and frequencies of selected genetic mutated variants of a set of drug-metabolizing enzymes and transcription factors with first-line roles in the detoxification of physical and chemical xenobiotics, in a group of 153 patients self-reporting EHS symptoms, co-morbid in most cases with different degrees of MCS symptoms. Results were compared to those obtained on 147 MCS patients without EHS symptoms and on a healthy control group of 132 age- and sex-matched subjects, all groups enrolled within the Italian population.

Among EMFs emissions recognized as trigger factors in the group of 153 patients self-reporting electromagnetic hypersensitivity-EHS, video display units and television were the most frequently reported sources (75% of patients), followed by mobile and landline phones (53%) and by domestic appliances (48%). Further developments must necessarily include a more objective and standardized classification of individual electromagnetic sensitivity scores, to conclusively assess the proposed parameters as a distinctive and specific panel of disease biomarkers for EHS. Our findings will hopefully contribute, in combination with the so-far putative genetic-risk factors, a better molecular definition of environmental-borne sensitivity-related illnesses and a tool to discriminate single SRI comorbidities, based on sufficiently proven molecular evidences able to gain clinical consensus.

See the website www.SAFEhelpsyou.org for more information on developing projects for referrals to areas that are safe for persons with EHS andMCS.